So Newt won yet another debate. It's easier to figure that out now since there's not a multitude of candidates on the stage, all trying to fit a coherent answer into 30 seconds. Still, Newt usually walks away with the prize for debating skills. This doesn't minimize the skills of the other candidates - Rick Santorum argued conservatism forcefully and passionately. Rick Perry had his best debate showing yet. Mitt has been doing this for so long, well, he just avoids screwing up - which is what is making him the default nominee. Doesn't seem right, but it is what it is...

We enjoyed Newt steamrolling Juan Williams. In questions tinged with race-baiting, Mr. Williams tried to paint Newt (and all Republicans) as an insensitive, bigoted, heartless CAPITALIST who only seeks to exploit minorities and the poor in demeaning jobs. Newt didn't even slow down for the speed bump, positing that work is more edifying than welfare, and a paycheck provides more dignity and reward than a wad of food stamps. When questioned on his insensitivity in suggesting that being a janitor was an option for poor youth, Mr. Gingrich pointed out that union janitors make a living that most would consider very comfortable, and that earned cash in the pockets of the poor is what best serves the poor. We agree.

Still, what does it matter? All of the GOP debates have been exercises in gotcha journalism. The GOP sends up 8, 7, 6, and now 5 candidates to answer questions asked by an agenda driven media not interested in the answers, just the perception that there is something wrong with all of them. We are diverted to wedge issues designed to make the candidates look at best out of touch, and at worst stupid. I cannot think of a single question asked in the multitude of debates that has allowed a candidate to weigh in on an issue of substance. That holds whether the debate is sponsored by CNN, MSNBC or FoxNews.

These debates are rolled out as a means of self-gratification for the moderators to show how much smarter they are than the people actually running for President. You would think that maybe one of the media types could understand that this is actually an important thing - the direction of the country is being decided. People have a need to be informed of the actual issues and policies of those seeking office. Still, news is not reported or investigated. Instead we get infotainment looking for drama. Talking heads preening for the cameras. American Idol, DC style. And we wonder why the best we can come up with to lead the country is Barack Obama or Mitt Romney.

We have asked for this. We have insulated ourselves from anything that challenges our point of view. Instead of being confronted with Walter Cronkite or Huntley and Brinkley, and making an informed decision on what is presented, we can now go to any number of sources who just present what we want to hear. It is hard to think critically when your news source always agrees with you.

There was a time when the election of a President was about more than who screwed up less on TV or YouTube. There was a time that the idea of America was more than "what's in it for me?". Sadly, those days appear to be gone.We have progressed from E Pluribus Unum to the iPad, iPod, iPhone and iNews. I, the me, has replaced we, the people.

So we have entertainment disguised as serious debate. The lone departure from this formula was the Cain / Gingrich one on one before the Cain candidacy imploded National Enquirer style. This does not serve America. We have often brought out the illustration of Nero's "bread and circuses" - keep the people fat and entertained, and they won't think about how they are getting screwed by the powers that be.

It is not hopeless - there are people who do pay actual attention to the issues, and the challenges facing the country. They are not interested in the victor of the next GOP cage match, they are interested in solutions. They sit on both sides of the aisle.

Yup, I said it. There are Democrats out there who are every bit as concerned with the wrong turn this country has made as the Republicans are. When you are out of work, losing your home, and wincing every time you fill up the gas tank, we all have a pretty universal point of view. This is wrong and needs to stop.

So we can do another 4 years of what isn't working, or try something different. We remember what happened in 2008 - the crap hit the fan and everyone panicked. Economic Armageddon was breathing down our necks. John McCain tanked his Presidential bid by shutting down the campaign to whip DC back into shape, and Obama looked like the cooler head. In hindsight he was the cooler head because he had no clue as to what was needed to fix the problem. To be fair, neither did George Bush, who left a stain in his own pants as well.

In the 3 years following, nothing has worked with any effectiveness. You can tell by the anemic economic growth, the unemployment rate that sits above the "promised land" of 8% (and is really about 14% in real numbers), and an inflation rate that would give Jimmy Carter pause. Oh, and the housing market in the tank...

Time to try a better direction, and that direction is held by the GOP. Hell, Tim Geithner said it himself - he (and by definition the Democrats) are out of bullets. Nothing that they have tried has worked "as well as expected". Time for a market based solution that isn't panic driven. Newt nailed that point in the debate, as did Rick and Rick and Mitt. The conservative argument should always be what it is - "We want everyone to succeed to the heights that their talent and hard work will carry them." We accept no limits on success, we accept no limits on potential. Every GOP candidate is carrying that message.

Newt said it best this week. He may always say it best. He may make an excellent President, or burn out in a tissy-fit. Every GOP candidate carries this same belief. President Obama has been a harsh disappointment. It's time to move in another direction. So says Common Sense.

RLB